"Some time in the second year after our removal to Manchester, there was in the place where we lived an unusual excitement on the subject of religion. . . . [G]reat multitudes united themselves to the dfiferen religious parties, which created no small stir and division amongst the people, some crying, 'Lo, here?' and others, 'Lo, there!' Some were contending for the Methodist faith, some for the Presbyterian, and some for the Baptist.
"For, notwithstanding the great love which he converts to these different faiths expressed at the time of their conversion, and the great zeal manifested by the respective clergy, who were active in getting up and promoting this extraordinary scene of religious feeling, in order to have everybody converted, as they were pleased to call it, let them join what sect they pleased; yet when the converts began to file off, some to one party and some to another, it was seen that the seemingly good feelings of both the priests and the converts were more pretended than real; for a scene of great confusion and bad feeling ensued -- priest contending against priest, and convert against convert; so that all their good feelings one for another, if they ever had any, were entirely lost in a strife of words and a contest about opinions."
Joseph Smith correctly recognized that the pure love of Christ didn't exist in that setting. And, to be honest, I never fully understood those paragraphs until I started reading some of the anti-Mormon stuff on FR, posted by "Christians" who saw no irony in being ugly and insulting in order to prove that they are more "Christian" than us Mormons.
ladylawyer. I still hold that your cognative dissonance is amazing. It is clearly understood that the reason Joeseph Smith Jr. started his little religion was that he claimed that God himself told him all current “religions” were an abomination. It was YOUR guy that started this little spat. You apparantly are unwilling to accept this fact. Again...remind me to never hire you as my attorney. Your eyes are too glazed over.
Not a bad "apologetic" post from an LDS apologetical view, LL...from a "Christian" perspective just a wee bit of a problem with your narrow interpretation of Pearl of Great Price, Joseph Smith - History, vv. 18-20. That "wee" problem is the "broad" and "blunt" slam of the LDS Church that ALL non-Mormon churches are "apostate."
Yeah, we know it'd be nice if you could just slam the churches of Joe's home town in NY (from your perspective, "Obviously, they deserved it.")
Yeah, we know it'd be nice if you could just slam the Christian posters on FReeper threads (from your perspective, "Yup, they ESPECIALLY deserve it.")
The problem is the Mormon claim of the apostasy is all-inclusive...and it's rather slyly deceptive of you to suggest that it's anything less than universal.
But I'm glad you posted the other portion of that LDS "Scripture" section because it's rarely quoted...it's a fascinating eye-opener to see how much Joseph Smith relied only on feelings...a burning of the bosom...a burning elsewhere (marrying 9-ll wives already married to other men), not to mention the dozens of others--including young teens...note all the "feeling" words below Smith used to judge people he didn't know (what? you're going to take the word of a 14 yo kid that he was able to correctly assess every church and church leader in the region & beyond? Smith did what 14 yo confused kids do...they base evaluations entirely upon FEELINGS):
Smith: ...religious feeling, in order to have everybody converted, as they were pleased to call it, let them join what sect they pleased; yet when the converts began to file off, some to one party and some to another, it was seen that the seemingly good feelings of both the priests and the converts were more pretended than real; for a scene of great confusion and bad feeling ensued -- priest contending against priest, and convert against convert; so that all their good feelings one for another...
You: I never fully understood those paragraphs until I started reading some of the anti-Mormon stuff on FR, posted by "Christians" who saw no irony in being ugly and insulting in order to prove that they are more "Christian" than us Mormons.
Mormons more than anyone should be quite sensitive to what it's like to be pushed or "ushered" out of their homes (Missouri & Nauvoo). A number of those "gentile" folks weren't what I would call "hospitable"--many whom took LDS homes & land after they left.
Now think of this word picture: Folks in Christ are "settled" in as Christians...along comes somebody who accuses ALL (not some) these Christian "sects" folks of being "corrupt"...they are accused of embracing ALL (not some) creeds which are abominable...what's more, he AND his immediate followers accuse ALL of them of being "apostates"...he and his followers basically accuse every Christian & every Christian sect of belonging to the spiritual graveyard, and attempt to bury them...And just like the "Gentiles" who came & took over the LDS land in MO & IL, the Mormons come as squatters and camp on the so-called "graveyard" of Christianity...Whenever anyone visits the squatters huddling over the alleged graveyard of Christianity and claims that "No, those Christians aren't dead, they're alive & well, thank you" the common retort is, "Oh, so you think these dead folks we spiritually buried are more 'Christian' than us Mormons, eh? Well, we're as much a Christian as they are/were."
When we object to our alleged apostate graveyard status, too many LDS don't ever seem to have qualms about pushing us out of our "home" identity as "Christians." (Please note the endless stream of LDS insinuations that if we "dare" even try to establish any definitional "boundaries" as to what a "Christian" is we are acting in some "self-righteous" manner).
Imagine a Mormon online discussion where some LDS folks are putting down some of the practices of polygamous fundamentalist Mormons. Could you then imagine the utter gall if a polygamous fundamentalist Mormon said to the LDS folks:
...to be honest, I never fully understood those paragraphs until I started reading some of the anti-fundamentalist Mormon stuff on XYZ,posted by "Mormons" who saw no irony in being ugly and insulting in order to prove that they are more "Mormon" than us fundamentalist Mormons.
So you're telling us that being a "Mormon" is a "Mormon" and that fundamentalist polygamous "Mormons" are both "Mormons" and also "Christians" too? (I mean who would you be, according to your apologetic, to tell Warren Jeffs' successor(s) that they are not either "Mormon" or "Christian?"
Oh??
How do you know he was CORRECT??
History has shown that NO religious activity was taking place in the area that JS claimed it was.
Do you have any data to disprove that?